05a30433
03-20-2003
Rufus E. Thompson, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.
Rufus E. Thompson v. United States Postal Service
05A30433
03-20-03
.
Rufus E. Thompson,
Complainant,
v.
John E. Potter,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service,
Agency.
Request No. 05A30433
Appeal No. 01A02660
Agency Nos. 1D-272-0004-98; 1D-272-0011-98
Hearing Nos. 140-98-8313X; 140-98-8316X
DECISION ON REQUEST TO RECONSIDER
On January 31, 2003, Rufus E. Thompson (complainant) timely initiated a
request to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to reconsider the
decision in Rufus E. Thompson v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 01A02660 (December
30, 2001). EEOC regulations provide that the Commissioners may,
in their discretion, reconsider any previous decision where the party
demonstrates that: (1) the previous decision involved a clearly erroneous
interpretation of material fact or law; or (2) the decision will have a
substantial impact on the policies, practices, or operation of the agency.
29 C.F.R. � 1614.405(b).
The previous decision awarded complainant a total of $12,231.60 in
compensatory damages, $10,000 for non-pecuniary compensatory damages and
$2,231.60 for pecuniary losses. In the request before us, complainant
claims, inter alia, that the previous decision erred when it did not
reimburse him for losses associated with his life insurance, mortgage,
and savings bonds. As noted in the previous decision, complainant failed
to submit supporting documentation and did not establish the requisite
causal link between the agency's actions and his losses.<1>
In order to merit the reconsideration of a prior decision, the requesting
party must submit written argument that tends to establish that at least
one of the criteria of 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405(b) is met. The Commission's
scope of review on a request for reconsideration is narrow and is not
merely a form of a second appeal. Lopez v. Department of the Air Force,
EEOC Request No. 05890749 (September 28, 1989); Regensberg v. USPS,
EEOC Request No. 05900850 (September 7, 1990). The Commission finds that
the complainant's request does not meet the regulatory criteria of 29
C.F.R. � 1614.405(b), in that, this request does not identify a clearly
erroneous interpretation of material fact or law, nor does it show that
the underlying decision will have a substantial impact on the policies,
practices or operation of the agency.
After a review of the complainant's request for reconsideration, the
previous decision, and the entire record, the Commission finds that the
request fails to meet the criteria of 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405(b), and it
is the decision of the Commission to deny the request. The decision
in EEOC Appeal No. 01A02660 remains the Commission's final decision.
There is no further right of administrative appeal on the decision of
the Commission on a request for reconsideration. The agency is directed
to comply with the Order from the prior decision, as restated, below.
ORDER
The agency is ordered to take the following remedial action:
1. If it has not already done so, the agency shall pay complainant
$12,231.60 in compensatory damages. Such payment shall be made within
thirty (30) days of the date this decision becomes final.
The agency is further directed to submit a report of compliance, as
provided in the statement entitled �Implementation of the Commission's
Decision.� The report shall include evidence that corrective action
has been implemented.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMISSION'S DECISION (K0501)
Compliance with the Commission's corrective action is mandatory.
The agency shall submit its compliance report within thirty (30)
calendar days of the completion of all ordered corrective action. The
report shall be submitted to the Compliance Officer, Office of Federal
Operations, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, P.O. Box 19848,
Washington, D.C. 20036. The agency's report must contain supporting
documentation, and the agency must send a copy of all submissions to
the complainant. If the agency does not comply with the Commission's
order, the complainant may petition the Commission for enforcement
of the order. 29 C.F.R. � 1614.503(a). The complainant also has the
right to file a civil action to enforce compliance with the Commission's
order prior to or following an administrative petition for enforcement.
See 29 C.F.R. �� 1614.407, 1614.408, and 29 C.F.R. � 1614.503(g).
Alternatively, the complainant has the right to file a civil action on
the underlying complaint in accordance with the paragraph below entitled
"Right to File A Civil Action." 29 C.F.R. �� 1614.407 and 1614.408.
A civil action for enforcement or a civil action on the underlying
complaint is subject to the deadline stated in 42 U.S.C. 2000e-16(c)
(1994 & Supp. IV 1999). If the complainant files a civil action, the
administrative processing of the complaint, including any petition for
enforcement, will be terminated. See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.409.
STATEMENT OF COMPLAINANT'S RIGHTS - ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
COMPLAINANT'S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (P0900)
This decision of the Commission is final, and there is no further right
of administrative appeal from the Commission's decision. You have the
right to file a civil action in an appropriate United States District
Court within ninety (90) calendar days from the date that you receive
this decision. If you file a civil action, you must name as the defendant
in the complaint the person who is the official agency head or department
head, identifying that person by his or her full name and official title.
Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of your case in court.
"Agency" or "department" means the national organization, and not the
local office, facility or department in which you work.
RIGHT TO REQUEST COUNSEL (Z1199)
If you decide to file a civil action, and if you do not have or cannot
afford the services of an attorney, you may request that the Court appoint
an attorney to represent you and that the Court permit you to file the
action without payment of fees, costs, or other security. See Title VII
of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. � 2000e et seq.;
the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. �� 791, 794(c).
The grant or denial of the request is within the sole discretion of
the Court. Filing a request for an attorney does not extend your time
in which to file a civil action. Both the request and the civil action
must be filed within the time limits as stated in the paragraph above
("Right to File A Civil Action").
FOR THE COMMISSION:
______________________________
Carlton M. Hadden, Director
Office of Federal Operations
______03-20-03____________
Date
1Complainant also claimed that the agency has not fully complied
with other provisions of the AJ's Order, as adopted by the agency.
Complainant is advised that he must initially contact the agency's
EEO officer and address these matters pursuant to the Commission's
regulations. 29 C.F.R. � 1614.504.